My parents decided to do things a bit differently with me and my siblings. They didn’t want us to be fed with the same prejudices that inhabit the thinking of regular schoolchildren. They wanted us to have an open mind, form our own opinions and have the confidence of being able to think out of the box. This is why we never even hired a professional tutor.

The education system in our society – be it schools or madrassas – tend to frame minds according to their ideologies. Our parents let us act according to our own choice and did not force us to fit in to a particular mindset. They let us decide what we wanted to pursue and who we wanted to be.

Learning by example set them off on the right track.

In the beginning, we were inspired to study when we noticed the people around us; they were often seen with reading material in their hands.

As Piaget’s theory on child development points out, a child should be seen as an explorer. We, too, explored the things which were around us; we explored books. We would take the books to our parents and asked them to tell us what they were for because they seemed so interesting. Our parents encouraged us to read the books ourselves. That was the commencement of self-studying. And of course, this was after we had developed familiarity with the alphabets and so on!

The specific freedom to sleep as needed has recently been shown as a strong benefit for homeschoolers.

But it’s not like home-school isn’t cool. There are no boundaries in this system; you can do whatever you feel like doing regardless of time constraints. In fact, you are entirely free to follow your call, study when you think it is the right time and indulge in whatever subjects you enjoy the most. If you don’t feel like studying, there’s no one to force you to do it. Everything you do is up to you. You have the liberty to wake up and sleep when you want to. Nobody is there to tell you to go to bed because you have to wake up for school tomorrow. No one will wake you up early in the morning and say,

Music teachers, Uwe and Hannelore Romeike, want to homeschool their children. In the United States, potential homeschoolers seek out our state homeschooling rights and responsibilities and follow them in order to homeschool. Romeikes would prefer their children were educated in their home country of Germany. But, unlike the United States, homeschooling isn’t possible in Germany, so they moved to Tennessee to continue educating their children as they wished. Political asylum was sought in the United States to protect the family from being fined, having their children forced from their home and taken to public school, along with the potential they could lose their children for homeschooling them. Trying to wade past the emotion within the homeschool community, this post will share some of the details of an asylum case that will be heard in April in the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.

From the New York Times in 2010 – by Campbell Robertson, regarding Uwe and Hannelore discovering homeschooling and their start in Germany educating their two oldest children:

“She knew a family, but she didn’t want to mention their name because it wasn’t legal,” Mr. Romeike said.

Months of research followed: the Romeikes read articles, sat in on court cases and talked to other home-schoolers in Germany. Eventually they decided to give it a try. Working with a curriculum from a private Christian correspondence school — one not recognized by the German government — they expected to be punished with moderate fines and otherwise left alone.

Before I started homeschooling, I researched, read articles and talked to other homeschoolers. Fortunately, I did not have to sit in a court room weighing the cons of homeschooling. My neighbors did not have to block the police from removing my children from our home because we homeschooled. The Global Post reports this 2006 incident in Krista Kapralos’ 2010 article:

Romeike’s heart stopped. He didn’t know what to do. He prayed the officers would go away if he didn’t answer the door. Instead, Romeike said, the officers left a voice message threatening to break in. (more…)

This is an interesting article discussing the Langariti family’s routine, meals, and challenges. The “expert view” focused on nutritional needs, which I found oddly refreshing compared to the usual concerns of “socialization” and finding a way to count us.

From her own life experience — missing out on the attention of her parents — Beatrice Langariti promised herself that she would be there for her children and one of the ways would be homeschooling and she has kept this promise. The mother of five put aside her degree and masters to teach her children. She shared her story with Gloria Nakajubi.

Education Minister Leighton Andrews has now removed the idea from forthcoming legislation and civil servants are analysing the responses to a consultation on a draft bill which would have changed the law.

He [Fortune-Wood] said local council officials did not have the expertise to decide whether children were being taught properly.

You’ve got to remember a lot of these families are home educators because of serious problems at school”

“It (the bill) effectively means the state is responsible for educating the children and parents have to seek permission for what otherwise would have been their responsibility.”

Here is more background information about the now delayed proposal:

Home schooling: Parents in Wales must register children September 3, 2012 BBC Wales

Last year 986 children of compulsory school age were known to have been taught at home.

But it is difficult to compile accurate figures because parents are not currently required to register home-schooled children with their local authority, unless the child is registered at a special school.

The authorities’ concern for accurate home education statistics is befuddling. Unless, we consider the real fear might be the lack of control. Another excerpt from the 2012 BBC article:

Education Minister Leighton Andrews said the existing laws had shortcomings.

Without a requirement for parents to notify councils “it is very difficult for local authorities to carry out their duties to ensure that children are receiving a suitable education,” he said.

Possibly, over the months, Andrews and others considered parents wanting the best for their beloved children might rule out the notion that local authorities need to follow up on private education.

MPs urged the Department for Education (DfE) to audit local authorities’ home education performance and review the guidance they are given.

[The House of Commons Education] Committee chair Graham Stuart said: “We support the right of parents to educate their children at home and accept that home educating families should bear the costs of that provision.

“We don’t think it reasonable, however, that it should be so difficult to access an exam centre nor that families should pay exam costs on top of everything else. Everyone else gets to take GCSEs and home-educated children should do so as well.”

It is “not reasonable” that some home-educated young people have poor access to public examinations, warns the House of Commons Education Committee today in a report calling on the Government to ensure fair access and to meet the associated costs.

The report published today concludes a short inquiry that examined the support available for home educators and their families. Members of the Committee met home educators, national and local support groups, and a number of local authority officers from across the country.

There wasn’t any direct feedback from home educators in the Huffington Post article, so I went to our friend and author, Mike Fortune Wood, who lives and learns ‘across the pond’. He runs the UK Home-Education.org site and also started up World Guide to Home Education. Mike offered a more detailed explanation about the situation related in this report.

Unusually, while the HE community are normally reluctant to involve politicians, this report appears to have been broadly welcomed. The committee is not part of the government but is a cross party committee of members of parliament who’s roll it is to monitor and comment on government policy in the area of education.

It recognises that there are long standing difficulties over examinations. GCSEs are the exams that school children take at age 16. Good passes in these exams are required to go on to take advanced GCEs which are required for entry to University, although many home educators have creatively found alternative routs.

The costs of these exams can vary enormously depending upon subject and location. While some parents can pay around £60 ($90) per exam others can pay £200 ($300) for them. For conventional entry to university a child will need perhaps 5 GCSEs (English, Maths, a modern language and perhaps two or three others in and around the chosen subject of study at university) and a further 3 advanced GCEs (normally taken at around 18 years of age.)

In addition to the costs it can be very difficult to locate an examination centre willing to accept external candidates. Schools, where these exams are taken, often make it difficult for home educated children to access the exams and there is no duty placed upon the local authorities (like school boards) to help, although some do assist in finding places.

It is hoped that this report may lead to positive action forcing, or at least encouraging, local authorities to assist HE parents gain access to examination centres and to reduce the costs to more manageable levels and not see home educators as a ‘cash cow’ to aid schools budget deficits.

The report also speaks about varying levels of support/harassment home educators experience in different parts of England as well as the difficulties parents of children with special needs face with respect to necessary support and even medical assistance. For example a study of approximately 150 local authority websites all but 30 contained statements requiring home educators to jump through hurdles not required by law.

The report also recognised that while home educators generally remain for the most part, independent minded, it is generally recognised that families of children with special needs require support and they hope that this report will end the ‘post code’ lottery that has been a feature of home education since it first became a movement in the UKsome 30 years ago.

Good wishes to the home educators for useful resolutions of testing and special needs problems.

International observers may be a little confused about why the U.S. Senate just rejected a treaty that has been ratified by 125 countries and is substantially based on U.S. law. They also might be forgiven for wondering what, exactly, this has to do with homechooling. In addition to groups like the Heritage Foundation — which opposes nearly any U.N. treaty on sovereignty grounds — and anti-abortion politicians like Rick Santorum who argue, inaccurately, that the law could lead to abortion being mandated for disabled children, the politically powerful, but usually under-the-radar U.S. homeschooling movement has been one of the most pivotal lobbies working against U.S. Senate ratification of the treaty.

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities ostensibly would have expanded access and opportunity for the disabled. But opponents, particularly those in homeschooling and faith-based organizations, argued that it redefined parental rights more narrowly while impinging on U.S. sovereignty.
In a floor speech Tuesday morning, Democratic Sen. Christopher Coons (Del.) acknowledged his office had been barraged with calls from homeschooled families in his district urging him to vote against the treaty, although he dismissed the calls as stemming from scare tactics and said he still planned a “yes” vote.

The treaty, backed by President Obama and former Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole (R-Kan.), fell five votes short of the two-thirds majority needed for confirmation as dozens of Senate Republicans objected that it would create new abortion rights and impede the ability of people to homeschool disabled children.

Lee told Senators on Tuesday that the treaty “threatens the right of parents to raise their children with the constant looming threat of state interference.”

“We all want to support the best interest of the the child, every child,” Lee said in a speech on the Senate floor. “But I and many of my constituents, including those who home school their children or send their children to private or religious schools, have justifiable doubts that a foreign U.N. body, a committee operating out of Geneva, Switzerland should decide what is in the best interest of the child at home with his or her parents in Utah or in any other state in our great union.”

He [Santorum] and other conservatives argued that the treaty could relinquish U.S. sovereignty to a U.N. committee charged with overseeing a ban on discrimination and determining how the disabled, including children, should be treated. They particularly worried that the committee could violate the rights of parents who choose to home school their disabled children.

The convention consists of a preamble and 50 (!) articles. Under Article 4 (1)(b), ratifying states pledge to “take all appropriate measures, including legislation, to modify or abolish existing laws, regulations, customs and practices that constitute discrimination against persons with disabilities,” and under 4 (1)(d), to “refrain from engaging in any act or practice that is inconsistent” with the convention. Who gets to define whether an existing law, regulation, custom, or practice “constitute[s] discrimination against” the deaf, blind, epileptic, diabetic, or paraplegic? Or — to name a few of the other groups currently deemed disabled — persons afflicted with psychosis, cancer, emotional dysfunction, narcolepsy, learning disability, past alcohol or drug abuse if in rehab, or serious contagious disease? Your guess is as good as the Post editorialists’, except that they seem to have spent no time guessing or so much as thinking about the matter.

Will states and localities have to change their laws, or just the federal government? Glad you asked: Article 4, Section 5 says “The provisions of the present Convention shall extend to all parts of federal states without any limitations or exceptions.”

Libertarians, along with all those concerned with the autonomy of the institutions of private civil life, please note: under Article 4, section 1, part (e), states must “take all appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination on the basis of disability by any person, organization or private enterprise.” (Yes, “any.”) The employment provisions of the current federal ADA apply to employers with more than 15 employees, but Article 27 (1)(a) would seem to prescribe doing away with any such threshold; it requires states to “Prohibit discrimination on the basis of disability with regard to all matters concerning all forms of employment.”

Homeschooling concerns been brought up by Senators numerous times this morning.

In 2009, Larry and Susan Kaseman argued against treaty ratification here in the Home Education Magazine Taking Charge column. This article below is specifically about the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, but the argument of United States sovereign powers and parental oversight remain:

If ratification of the convention becomes an issue, we will be better prepared to oppose it if we view it as part of larger issues and are aware of the factors that limit the changes the convention by itself would bring. Until it becomes an issue (if it ever does), we can strengthen our position on important issues by understanding and exercising our rights and responsibilities as families and working to prevent professionals and experts from taking over the roles of parents.

It is scheduled to be voted on today at noon eastern time. Senate contact information is here.

Update – This treaty ratification did not pass, as the vote require a 2/3 majority per Article 2-Section 2 of the Constitution. The vote was 61-38.

The Air Force Times features an article on homeschooling by staff writer Jon R. Anderson, titled the ABCs of Home Schooling:

Experts estimate there are 2 million home-schoolers, with their numbers growing as much as 12 percent annually in recent years. And there is data to indicate that military families are home schooling at perhaps twice the national average.

That doesn’t surprise the Rexfords, who have been home schooling for 10 years. “Home schooling fits the military lifestyle very well,” James Rexford says. “When you move, the school goes with you. When you have time off, the kids can take time off with you.”

Former News & Commentary editor and Home Education Magazine columnist Valerie Moon, who runs the website The Military Homeschooler, remembers when the brass in Europe tried to forbid homeschooling, but adds, “That’s all gone now, the military has become very supportive.”

A sidebar highlights support resources for military homeschooling families, and explains how writer Jon R. Anderson’s family got into homeschooling: “My gut tightened when my wife first floated the idea of home schooling six months ago.”

The Military Times Media Group has been the premiere source for military news and information for the military and government sectors for over 60 years.

In an article title The Homeschool Movement’s German Lesson Joy Pavelski reports in The American, the Journal of the American Enterprise Institute, on the German homeschooling family which moved to the U.S.:

On January 26, a Tennessee judge granted political asylum to Uwe and Hannelore Romeike and their five children, three years after German police forcibly transferred the three eldest children—then aged 9, 8, and 6—from their home in Bissingen to state school. The U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) appealed the Tennessee ruling a month later, placing the case in limbo. If the appeal is rejected, more foreign homeschoolers may seek asylum in the United States, where roughly 2 million children homeschool.

“The United States granted roughly 1 in 5 of its more than 47,000 political asylum requests in 2008. This was the first reported such case predominantly linked with foreign restrictions against homeschooling.”